Amazon.com Widgets

Friday, September 28, 2007

Murders, Shootings of Newark Teens May Have Been Anti-Gay Hate Crimes

Newark triple murder may be anti-gay hate crime

Victims’ friends ‘driven to despair’ over alleged police, media cover-up


By LOU CHIBBARO JR. | Sep 27, 1:52 PM

A close friend of three college students who were shot to death execution style in a Newark, N.J., schoolyard in August said the students planned to join him in attending a black Gay Pride event in Queens, N.Y., the day following their deaths.


Did the students plan to attend Gay Pride event?


News of the students’ plans to attend the Aug. 5 event at New York City’s Riis Park Beach surfaced after a New Jersey gay group released a letter last week calling on Newark authorities to investigate the murders as possible anti-gay hate crimes.

The murder of the three students and the shooting of a fourth student, who is recovering from a gunshot wound to the head, shocked Newark’s citizens and became the subject of international news coverage.

“[W]e want to know why, although the murders were committed more than a month ago, the fact of the sexual orientation of the youth has never been a part of the media or public discourse of the murders,” said Newark gay activist James Credle in a letter to Newark Mayor Cory Booker.

Activist says "one or more of the murdered students were gay"


“This happened despite the fact that several sources, including friends, boyfriends/lovers of at least one of the victims and perhaps one of the parents knew that one or more of the murdered students were gay,” Credle wrote.

....activists have said police and city officials appear to be ignoring evidence suggesting that the killings were hate crimes related to the victims’ actual or perceived sexual orientation. Credle told the Blade that he and others in the gay community have learned from friends and relatives of the victims that little of value was taken from the victims. He said friends claim all of their wallets were left at the scene.

Credle and others have questioned why the attackers, wielding guns, would have killed the victims if robbery alone was the motive.

Police have said all the victims were upstanding citizens who never had any run-ins with the law. Three were students at Delaware State University and one, Hightower, had planned to begin classes there this fall.

The friend of the student who spoke with the Blade, a 20-year-old Newark resident, said at least one of the victims was openly gay and all the others had gay friends and were known to hang out in “gay circles” at their high schools before going on to college.

The friend declined to disclose his name, saying he is concerned about possible negative consequences of speaking out openly about the sexual orientation of the deceased students.

entire Washington Blade article here


Technorati Tags:
, , , , , ,


Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, August 10, 2007

The LOGO Debate: Why Marriage Is NOT The Only Question

Watched the majority of the Human Rights Campaign + LOGO Presidential Candidates Forum last night.

Marc Ambinder at The Atlantic has "A Reported Blog on Politics" with a post-HRC/Logo entry entitled The LOGO Debate: Marriage Is The Question which really was mainly an overview of what the candidates said, mainly about the issue of gay marriage.

Ambinder writes that " It’s helpful to look at this debate through two lenses: the hopeful lens of the gay community and the skeptical lens of the pundit who is always peering around the corner at the general election."

One commenter wrote: "The LGBT community will never accept John Edwards as long as he keeps up with his stump speech about how "conflicted" he is over gay marriage."

But as Ambinder writes "...gay marriage – that’s the holy grail for many (though by no means all) of the gay community."

I couldn't agree more. And that's what I wrote at Marc's blog too:

Am I disappointed that Edwards is not more 'developed'? Sure, but I have not completely dismissed his viability as an electible presidential candidate. I for one am not a single issue voter, or okay, i am RARELY a single issue voter.

Something I would argue is valuable to keep in mind about what John Edwards does bring to the table: Economic Justice issues for working and middle class folks -- that includes most of us in the GLBT community, some are far more privileged and economically elite, but most of us are not.

Here's why I believe Edwards should not be completely dismissed: His focus on the economy and economic justice, health care and his national economic stimulation plans to put people to work for more than minimum wage and to make sure workers no longer suffer while the richest and greediest -- the friends of Bush and Cheney -- become even wealthier at the expense of all the rest of us.

When the majority of regular working people begin experiencing and reaping economic benefits which currently are not available to most working people, zero to poor people and most are not being experienced by many other middle class working families -- i.e. the less stressed, less crunched they feel and the less economically stressed they actually are -- the more open to change, the more generous their attitudes in many areas toward social progress, social justice including GLBT issues.

Kevin Phillips and others have well-documented Republican administrations' devastation to working families (especially pointed beginning with Reagan) -- it has become far worse under Bush Cheney despite the happy talk. Look what is happening in the financial markets right now. None of these people give a crap about whether middle class, working, much less poor people have houses, health care or jobs. All they care about is whether their investments make profits. That is the real republican mandate. They obfuscate that truth and hide it from the stupid evangelicals with emotional sleights of hand to keep them from understanding and knowing their own economic issues.

How/Why do we fail to understand the same thing?

While their own economic survival is at stake -- which it very much is at this point in our country -- It is harder for people to feel generous and tolerant toward others.

When people feel/believe/know/experience the very real economic devastation this administration has wrought on working people and on this economy for the past seven years (helped along by Bill Clinton's kowtowing to the global profiteers and multinational corporations via NAFTA), they do not/are not feeling very 'secure' and thus less tolerant, less generous, less sure about what this means for them.

Couple that with the mean-spirited divisiveness -- the republicans have known exactly how to keep americans divided, stressed, fighting, fragmented and NOT focusing on the most foundational important issues, especially the utter lack of concern that the republican party truly has for anyone but the truly wealthy. Right now they are demagoging the color of brown people and immigration BECAUSE it takes our eyes off the economic devastation they have inflicted upon this citizenry.

I do not condone Edwards' lack of progress in the marriage issue (Hillary and Obama are no better in their explanations), but I believe there are underlying foundational issues -- ECONOMIC ISSUES, THE ECONOMY, ECONOMIC JUSTICE -- to consider which have a critical impact on how people view/experience/talk/feel about not only OUR issues, but others such as: WAR, DOMESTIC SECURITY, IMMIGRATION, INTERNATIONAL POLICIES...etc

These are especially interconnected and extremely linked to how working families are doing economically (in addition to the leadership of our so-called leaders, grassroots efforts, personal relationships that folks have with their GLBT family members and friends....)

There are historical trends (yellow scare, brown scare, civil rights, womens rights, gay rights) which are deeply linked to economic (and educational and legal) progress as experienced by the masses in industrial societies.

I'm actually far more concerned about first tackling economic justice, health care, restoring pensions and benefits to retirees and workers, getting jobs to inner city -- and RURAL -- citizens and youth....because if our economic foundation crumbles further (like our infrastructure is doing), you can bet there will little or no mass support for OUR issues -- which will seem irrelevant to many many people.

If the republicans and their toadies continue to destroy the working families of this country (including GLBT families), there will continue to be accelerating, even more rapidly growing legions of our fellow citizens who are living in perpetual violence, despair, base indignities, who have children who are starving, dying, murdering, being murdered, parents who cannot get health care or elder care ... this is the road we are headed down at this moment unless there are major changes toward putting people in this country back to work at jobs that pay more than McDonald's or Walmart pittances.

That is why I will still listen to what John Edwards has to say despite his lack of progress at this point -- he has the capacity to learn and grow -- just like Obama, just like Clinton -- and one of these three -- or hell if only Gore would jump in, i'd support him -- but more than likely one of these three (none of whom has the perfect position on our issues) is likely to be the candidate. Sure I'd love Kucinich, but it's not realistic.

I for one am sick of the evil of the republican demagogues and if Edwards can win key voters in key states that Hillary and Obama can not, then his economic justice and health care platform combined with his commitment to full legal rights, is a major step in the right direction. I have no doubt that just as america will come along over the next five years (like Gravel stated), Edwards will grow too.

I could be wrong, but that's my take on things at this point. I'm not willing to count Edwards out yet.

Ambinder's Atlantic blog on the topic is here, my specific comments (mostly the same as above) here. And HRC Back Story Blog has some analysis and linked stories, too.





Technorati Tags:
, ,, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,, , , ,



Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, June 28, 2007

Former leaders of ex-gay ministry apologize

From the Los Angeles Times

3 former leaders of ex-gay ministry apologize

They cite psychological harm they caused gays as the ministry, Exodus International, meets in Irvine.

By Rebecca Trounson
Times Staff Writer

June 28, 2007

Three former leaders of Exodus International, often described as the nation's largest ex-gay ministry, publicly apologized Wednesday for the harm they said their efforts had caused many gays and lesbians who believed the group's message that sexual orientation could be changed through prayer.

Speaking at a Hollywood news conference, the former leaders of the interdenominational Christian organization said they had acted sincerely in their years of work with Exodus. But they said they had all, over time, become disillusioned with the group's ideas and concerned about what they described as the wrenching human toll of such gay conversion efforts.

"Sexual orientation isn't a light switch that you can switch on and off"

The news event, in a courtyard outside an office of the Los Angeles Gay & Lesbian Center, was timed to coincide with the opening of Exodus' annual conference, which is being held this week at Concordia University in Irvine. A competing "ex-gay survivor" convention is to begin Friday at UC Irvine.

Exodus' president, Alan Chambers, reached by phone at the meeting in Irvine, said he disagreed with its critics, adding that its methods have helped many people, including him.

"Exodus is here for people who want an alternative to homosexuality," Chambers said. "There are thousands of people like me who have overcome this. I think there's room for more than one opinion on this subject, and giving people options isn't dangerous."

The former leaders from Exodus cast its work in grim terms.

"Some who heard our message were compelled to try to change an integral part of themselves, bringing harm to themselves and their families," the three, including former Exodus co-founder Michael Bussee, said in a joint written statement presented at the news conference. "Although we acted in good faith, we have since witnessed the isolation, shame, fear and loss of faith that this message creates."

Now a licensed family therapist in Riverside, Bussee left Exodus in 1979 after he fell in love with a man who was a fellow ex-gay counselor with the group. He speaks out frequently against ex-gay therapies.

"God's love and forgiveness does indeed change people," said Bussee, who remains an evangelical Christian. "It changed me. It just didn't make me straight."

Others speaking at Wednesday's news conference included Jeremy Marks, former president of Exodus International Europe, and Darlene Bogle, the founder and former director of Paraklete Ministries, an Exodus referral agency based in Hayward, Calif.

All three said they had known people who had tried to change their sexual orientation with the help of the group but had failed, often becoming depressed or even suicidal as a result.

"We are committed Christians, but we're still gay," said Marks, who heads Courage UK, a gay-affirming evangelical ministry based in England.

Among those at the news conference was the Rev. Mel White, founder and president of a faith-based gay rights group called Soulforce. White, who was the ghostwriter for the Rev. Jerry Falwell's autobiography and later came out as gay, praised the former Exodus leaders.

"It's a major moment, a paradigm shift," White said. "They're saying this doesn't work, and that's incredibly important."

The Exodus meeting is expected to attract about 1,000 people, Chambers said. Chambers, who is married and has children, said he and other current Exodus officials are careful to warn those who seek help that such a path is not easy.

Sexual orientation "isn't a light switch that you can switch on and off," he said.

--------------------------------

LATimes reporter: rebecca.trounson@latimes.com

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Progressive Women Bloggers Ring
Power By Ringsurf